Springfield XD Forum banner

Families of Newtown victims sue rifle manufacturer

12K views 149 replies 43 participants last post by  Minkman555 
#1 ·
Just found this...

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — The families of nine of the 26 people killed and a teacher wounded two years ago at the Sandy Hook Elementary School filed a lawsuit Monday against the manufacturer, distributor and seller of the rifle used in the shooting.

The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit, filed in Bridgeport Superior Court, asserts that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle should not have been made publicly available because it was designed for military use and is unsuited for hunting or home defense.

"The AR-15 was specifically engineered for the United States military to meet the needs of changing warfare," attorney Josh Koskoff said in a release. "In fact, one of the Army's specifications for the AR-15 was that it has the capability to penetrate a steel helmet."

In addition to Bushmaster, the defendants are Camfour, a firearm distributor, and Riverview Gun Sales, the East Windsor store where the gunman's mother purchased the Bushmaster rifle in 2010.

Messages seeking comment from the defendants were not immediately returned.

Bill Sherlach, whose wife, Mary, was killed in the shooting, said he believes in the Second Amendment but also that the gun industry needs to be held to "standard business practices" when it comes to assuming the risk for producing, making and selling a product.

"These companies assume no responsibility for marketing and selling a product to the general population who are not trained to use it nor even understand the power of it," he said.

The plaintiffs include Sherlach and the families of Vicki Soto, Dylan Hockley, Noah Pozner, Lauren Rousseau, Benjamin Wheeler, Jesse Lewis, Daniel Barden, Rachel D'Avino and teacher Natalie Hammond, who was injured in the shooting.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages.

Nicole Hockley, Dylan's mother, planned a news conference later Monday morning with U.S. Rep. Elizabeth Esty and U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy.

The Newtown gunman, Adam Lanza, shot and killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, on the morning of Dec. 14, 2012, before driving to the school and gunning down 20 children and six educators with the semi-automatic rifle. He committed suicide as police arrived.

In 2005, Congress and President George W. Bush approved a federal law that shielded gun makers from lawsuits over criminal use of their products, with some exemptions.

In a lawsuit over the .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle used in the Washington, D.C.-area sniper shootings that killed 10 people in 2002, Bushmaster and a gun dealer agreed to pay $2.5 million to two survivors and six families in a 2004 settlement. It was the first time a gun manufacturer had agreed to pay damages to settle claims of negligent distribution of weapons, according to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

In that settlement, Bushmaster paid $550,000 and the Washington state gun dealer, where the sniper's rifle came from, paid $2 million.

In 2002, a federal judge in California ruled that Bushmaster and other gun manufacturers were not responsible for a 1999 shooting spree that killed a postal worker and injured five people at a Jewish community center in Los Angeles. The judge said a lawsuit by the victims' families did not show a link between the manufacturers and the shooting rampage.

Families of Newtown victims sue rifle manufacturer KSL.com
This is complete crap. Nancy Lanza should be held responsible for not securing her weapon and/ or giving her son access. Bushmaster, the distributor, and the shop where it was bought are not responsible. I hope they lose quickly.

As for the "it was designed for the military" comment, obviously these people don't know what they're talking about. This rifle, functionally, is no different than a mini-14. Heck, functionally, it's no different than an M1A.
 
#2 ·
by they're reasoning, Bolt action M1903 enfields, All Rem700's, and Berretta's 92FS were also all "designed" for the military because they eventually found their way into their inventory from civilian manufacture through government contract bids.
 
#4 ·
Can't fix stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: abizdafuzz
#6 ·
Well lets be real. They are the exact same thing besides the fun switch.
 
#9 ·
None of my American Sporting Rifles (ASR) are AR-15's. I do not own any ASR's made by Armalite or Colt.

The AR-15 was first built by ArmaLite as a small arms rifle for the United States armed forces. Because of financial problems, ArmaLite sold the AR-15 design to Colt. After modifications (most notably the relocation of the charging handle from under the carrying handle like the AR-10 to the rear of the receiver), the new redesigned rifle was subsequently adopted as the M16 rifle.[7] Colt then started selling the semi-automatic version of the M16 rifle as the Colt AR-15 for civilian sales in 1963 and the term has been used to refer to semiautomatic-only versions of the rifle since then.[8] The name "AR-15" remains a Colt registered trademark,
 
#10 ·
Now we are just nitpicking.
 
#13 ·
They can try to sue all they want...but I thought cases like this have been squashed time and time again. This would be like someone suing Ford because a drunk driver killed their kid while driving one of their vehicles. They can try all they want, but I doubt it will go anywhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moondoggie151
#17 ·
Just found this...



This is complete crap. Nancy Lanza should be held responsible for not securing her weapon and/ or giving her son access. Bushmaster, the distributor, and the shop where it was bought are not responsible. I hope they lose quickly.

As for the "it was designed for the military" comment, obviously these people don't know what they're talking about. This rifle, functionally, is no different than a mini-14. Heck, functionally, it's no different than an M1A.

This is a test, if they are able to successfully sue the makers here then it won't stop at that, they don't just object to military style weapons (which is crap anyway because a black powder Kentucky long rifle was once a "military weapon") they want them all! They know they have to do it inch-by-inch.

The wording in the suit is reminiscent of the liberal cries at the time that nobody needs an assault rifle to hunt deer with. I hope everyone joins the NRA because they are going to keep coming and their pockets are deeeeeep!

In an aside, the notion that people become screaming homicidal maniacs the moment they have an SKS, or AR 15 in their hands in ludicrous, at best. This is a parenting/mental health issue, not a firearms manufacturer issue.
 
#19 ·
I have an AR-15 not a sporting rifle. Screw the pc bull crap. Stupid lawsuit... Period.
 
#22 ·
If memory serves, aren't ARs over the past 20 years or so, machined so it isn't possible to convert as easily as older ones; i.e. "a pair of holes drilled"?
 
#30 ·
as a ct resident- f these families and everyone willing to exploit the deaths of those kids. everyone responsible for those kids being dead is already in the ground with them. the only other thing that would have kept those kids alive is someone with the tools and training to putting down that pos before he got into the school. im done w these a-holes.
 
#45 ·
About the only thing I disagree with in this thread is the notion that the families are financially exploiting their dead children. Because after all... When your elementary children is gunned down in one of the worst school shootings in US history... One naturally starts thinking of all the stuff they can buy.

Yes, the lawsuit it stupid. They have been trying it for decades. Ridiculous. About as ridiculous as calling a semiauto rifle an "American Sporting Rifle". Please. It's a weapon that is very good at what it was designed for... Putting a lot of high powered ammo on target very quickly. That's why I bought mine. Nobody is responsible for a murderer using it to murder people except the murderer.
 
#46 ·
Wow, the Brady bunch even provides a playbook: http://www.bradycampaign.org/sites/default/files/vice-avoiding-dismissal.pdf

Right off the bat, they go off the rails.
The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit, filed in Bridgeport Superior Court, asserts that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle should not have been made publicly available because it was designed for military use and is unsuited for hunting or home defense.
Tell that to all those hog hunters outs there. And to the many who do and have used it in home defense. Have they been talking to Shotgun Joe again? Hmm, why is it when government agencies put out contract bids for AR-15, or even select fire models, they call it a "personal defense weapon"?

See: If 8216 Assault Weapons 8217 Are Bad 8230 Why Does DHS Want to Buy 7 000 of Them for 8216 Personal Defense 8217 TheBlaze.com
 
#56 ·
OK Pile on!

I SWEAR I heard (directly from the horses mouth as it were) the local Sheriff say, a day or two after the fact, something like, "Contrary to early reports, the Bushmaster on the scene was left in the trunk of his car. It was never fired or taken inside the school".

I'm not normally taken to makin' crap up! In this case, am I? This was on CBS. Only reason I remember that is I NEVER watch CBS. Dayum!!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top